And the mother of one of the shot kids wants to sue the school because she thinks its their fault. Whatever. She claims there wasn't enough security.

Well, schools haven't had or needed security up until the last 10-15 years, and the fact that they do isn't the schools fault. So how is it there fault when some numbskull doesn't give a damn and subverts the security, shooting a couple of kids in the process?

I just don't see how it is the schools fault. Perhaps while parents point their finger at the schools they should notice where there other fingers are pointing.

[quote]When will Americans stop being so stubbornly sentimental about a horribly outdated constitutional right that was only relevant when "we" were under threat from the French, British, and roaming bears?<hr></blockquote>
"We"? I always, don't know why, thought you were Welsh, Belle.

[quote]Originally posted by Member:
<strong>
"We"? I always, don't know why, thought you were Welsh, Belle.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No sir. I was born in the UK, though, so perhaps the "we" is inappropriate. Mind you, I've lived here most of my life, pay taxes here, and vote here, so I guess I'm entitled to some rights.

[quote]Originally posted by Belle:
<strong>
Perhaps Glock could get some kind of deal similar to Apple selling large quantities of iBooks to schools? Educational discounts, too.

On a lighter... uh... darker note -

Why do some people have so little respect for human life?

Why is it so easy for these people to get the necessary tools to take away human life?

Why is Charlton Heston such a tool?

When will Americans stop being so stubbornly sentimental about a horribly outdated constitutional right that was only relevant when we were under threat from the French, British, and roaming bears?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well. Not all of us are. I like that "roaming bears" part...LOL.

I think that the problem is the powerful gun lobby has seen to it that most people, including the Supreme Court of US, overlook what the 2nd ammendment actually says....

"A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

Look at the first 3 or four words. That says it all. It doesn't say "hey folks, you have the right to keep and bear arms" It says you have the right to form a well organized militia. Unfortunately, everyone hears the last part as a buzz statement.

I am a Republican. But,

1) Handguns should be outlawed. They serve no purpose to the general public and are interfering witht he public good and welfare....which is what our government is supposed to protect.

2) If you are caught with a handgun, you go to jail. Period. Only law enforcement should have them, and certain law-related professions (like prison guards....they often need them when in public in case they run into ex-cons....I know a guard personally and this is required).

3) We should not outlaw hunting weapons like shotguns and the like. But guess what? You commit ANY violent crime and your guns are taken...period.

Yes, know there are other forms of violent crime. But, America has the highest death-by-gun rate of ANY nation in the entire world. Something like 25,000+ per year....that is insane. There should be a massive nationwide gun turn-in program. Even as a conservative I would support monies to do this.

Read that first part of the ammendment again and tell me the founding fathers wanted anyone to have a handgun for any reason with no way of organizing a fighting force. I'll laugh if you actually come away with that impression. We could also make the rather tired argument that the whole ammendment is horribly outdated. We could also argue that the orginal inetent of the ammendment was to protect us from a future federal govenment that would become a tyrannical regime...something which it almost has anyway I suppose. But the point is that people are supposed to be allowed to bear arms for the purposes of forming a well-organied militia, and I don't see too many of those on South Street in Philly right now, or the Watts area of Los Angeles, or anywhere else for that matter.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

[quote]Originally posted by Belle:
<strong>
No sir. I was born in the UK, though, so perhaps the "we" is inappropriate. Mind you, I've lived here most of my life, pay taxes here, and vote here, so I guess I'm entitled to some rights.

Wasn't revevs our resident Welshman? Is he still around?</strong><hr></blockquote>Haven't seen him. But, yes he was/is Welsh. For some strange reason I always thought of him as being a vicar.